Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29617177›Full record

Trial reportHuman vaccines & immunotherapeutics2018

Challenges in conducting a community-based influenza vaccine trial in a rural community in northern India.

Rakesh Kumar, Ritvik Amarchand, Venkatesh Vinayak Narayan, Siddhartha Saha, Kathryn E Lafond, Suresh K Kapoor, Lalit Dar, Seema Jain, Anand Krishnan

Open access · hybridAbstract readClinical Trial, Phase IVMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 34% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Rakesh Kumara All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Ansari Nagar , New Delhi , India.ORCID 0000-0001-8441-6860
Ritvik Amarchanda All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Ansari Nagar , New Delhi , India.
Venkatesh Vinayak Narayana All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Ansari Nagar , New Delhi , India.
Siddhartha Sahab Centers for Disease Control and Prevention , 1600 Clifton Road, Atlanta , GA , USA.
Kathryn E Lafondb Centers for Disease Control and Prevention , 1600 Clifton Road, Atlanta , GA , USA.
Suresh K Kapoorc Centre for Chronic Disease Control , New Delhi , India.
Lalit Dara All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Ansari Nagar , New Delhi , India.
Seema Jainb Centers for Disease Control and Prevention , 1600 Clifton Road, Atlanta , GA , USA.
Anand Krishnana All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Ansari Nagar , New Delhi , India.
All India Institute of Medical Sciences · INCenters for Disease Control and Prevention · USCentre for Chronic Disease Control · IN

Funding

Epidemiological study of Respiratory Pathogens in Acute Respiratory Tract InfectiU01IP000492 · IP · ALL-INDIA INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCES · PI KRISHNAN, ANAND · 2011 to 2015
$5.0M
NCIRD CDC HHS U01 IP000492
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Evidence on influenza vaccine effectiveness from low and middle countries (LMICs) is limited due to limited institutional capacities; lack of adequate resources; and lack of interest by ministries of health for influenza vaccine introduction. There are concerns that the highest ethical standards will be compromised during trials in LMICs leading to mistrust of clinical trials. These factors pose regulatory and operational challenges to researchers in these countries. We conducted a community-based vaccine trial to assess the efficacy of live attenuated influenza vaccine and inactivated influenza vaccine in rural north India. Key regulatory challenges included obtaining regulatory approvals, reporting of adverse events, and compensating subjects for trial-related injuries; all of which were required to be completed in a timely fashion. Key operational challenges included obtaining audio-visual consent; maintaining a low attrition rate; and administering vaccines during a narrow time period before the influenza season, and under extreme heat. We overcame these challenges through advanced planning, and sustaining community engagement. We adapted the trial procedures to cope with field conditions by conducting mock vaccine camps; and planned for early morning vaccination to mitigate threats to the cold chain. These lessons may help investigators to confront similar challenges in other LMICs.

Indexed as

Community ParticipationHumansIndiaInfluenza, HumanInfluenza VaccinesMass VaccinationRural Health ServicesRural PopulationVaccines, AttenuatedVaccines, InactivatedInfluenza VaccinesVaccines, AttenuatedVaccines, InactivatedChallengesinfluenzalow and middle income countriesvaccine trial

Identifiers

PMID29617177
PMCPMC6150048
OpenAlexW2795370218

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.